Of all of people that Mueller and his team have indicted, they have nothing that leads back to President Trump. Because the Deep State badly wants something on the president, Mueller and his team are subject all of those that the indict to Virtual Waterboarding. By threatening friends and family, Mueller and his team are hope to make someone, whither true or not, crack and give up some pay dirt on the president and his family.

The Republicans still have minority representation on the House Judiciary panel, and the ability to ask questions. So why haven't they asked Cohen if prosecution of his wife was threatened if he didn't testify against Trump, or did they and I just missed it?

This will not generate any conviction either. Odds are this was a Clinton thing. Cohen's lawyer, Lanny Davis, is a long time Clinton fixer and stooge. Davis probably convinced Cohen that they would probably let him off if he pled guilty to the Campaign Finance charge and switched back to the Democratic party. Their phony campaign finance charge is all they've been able to come up with on the President.

For those of you who have not been exposed to the Federal (so called) justice system, I have news for you: Mueller is operating by the standard playbook, which is to suborn perjury by any means possible. I know, because when I was called as a possible witness for a grand jury (an institution that should be abolished, IMNSHO) the prosecutor tried to dictate my testimony, threatening to prosecute me, assuring me that she could fabricate a case against anybody. She wasn't prepared when I fired back that I would file charges against her for suborning perjury and malicious threats. She still tried to have me named an unindicted co-conspirator, but the judge killed that attempt.

Sad to say, but everything the federal justice system has done since Comey's dismissal of charges against Hillary Clinton is just a small sample of the stinking corruption of our supposedly exemplary justice system. The unelected bureaucracy is in league with the most corrupt, self serving politicians, and will destroy anyone who dares cross their path.

I am disgusted with the current department of "justice". They are all crooks and people that work there are complicit in it all- sorry.

Take one look at Cohen's face. That inverted smile reveals a deeply unhappy human being on a basic level. Maybe thats why he is a lawyer....

Funny thing is that his life is ruined one way or the other. Cooperating with evil people doesnt seem to actually work. You might as well just tell the truth, and NOT betray your oath of client secrecy. He is still a felon, and without a law license forever. And by turning on trump, he gave up the only thing that might have saved him- a presidential pardon.

Well, according to some who have Famalia connections he might not make it out alive.
I heard he is going to one of the Club Fed facilities.

Why did the chicken cross the road...because it could...

"no factual data to support your verdict on the president "
Of course I have no data or verdict. Are you responding to someone else? I had never heard of Schiff, but I found him by searching Schiff evidence.

He is a weasel.

It was difficult to see his body language images during the hearing that were published. I did not watch it live. 😲

To save his ass. To get a book deal. To have relevance once he gets out of jail, provided he gets there.

You are fudging your reply.

Obviously you have no factual data to support your verdict on the president so you are resorting on other means.

If you are getting your insight from clowns like Schiff, who profess to have "evidence" on the president, it is understandable you voice this opinion.

Other than that, you have nothing.

Just more innuendo and irrelevant commentary.

The interesting thing is getting him to plead "guilty" to campaign finance law violations when many analysts don't believe that what he is accused of doing constitutes a violation of campaign finance law. The legal system is degenerating into the mode of "threaten the subject sufficiently that they will plead guilty to something." Sort of like the Inquisition.

Who knows what they took off the table in exchange for getting on the record that Trump was guilty of a non-existent campaign finance violation.

For reference, during the 2008 election, backers of John Edwards paid more than $1,000,000 to support his pregnant mistress to keep it from getting out. They actually charged him with campaign finance violations for that but the jury deadlocked and they dropped the charges rather than try again.

So paying Stormy Daniels $130,000 for the rights to her story on Trump's behalf probably wouldn't be something that would generate a conviction.

"allegations of Trump's supposed guilt"
"classic LBJ, Clintonesque, Obamanation code."
Almost nothing I have to say can be translated into slurs. The simplest way to say it is he looks like someone who sees a cop and takes off running. His explanation is cops are often corrupt, which is actually true, which is why we have a criminal justice system and it doesn't matter who looks guilty to me.

My kids are past the age where they can translate this into the language of juvenile slurs. Whoever was tasked to create the "liar, liar, pants on fire" poster for the Cohen testimony could probably do it.

When I was a kid I had a book published around the time licensing requirements were dropped for CB radio. It said in the future everyone on CB could have an amazing CB with repeaters to talk to anyone they wanted. I was incapable of imagining how true that was and what that future would look like.

Your allegations of Trump's supposed guilt are unsupportable innuendo - classic LBJ, Clintonesque, Obamanation code.
Did anything he was "caught" for have any relationship to the alleged purpose of the special counsel?
Did anything he was "caught" for expose evidence supporting guilt of Trump with regard to the alleged purpose of the (supposedly unbiased) special counsel?

"Got caught doing what?"
The things he was convicted of. I'm not speaking in code.

Got caught doing what?
What evidence do you have to make such conclusions?
I agree that there are no facts to support conclusions, so why do you assign guilt without evidence?
"Looks more guilty" is typical Hitlery-ite, Obama-ist irrational innuendo.

I think he got caught and now he's telling Democrats exactly what they want to hear. I don't know what he hopes to get out of it. I don't think there's a simple answer like someone threatened or blackmailed him. M

I used to think President Trump was probably innocent of wrongdoing, except for technicalities like failing to file some form. He looks more guilty to me all the time. It doesn't matter how it looks to me, though; we have to wait for the facts.